Render top speed on Hackintosh

this weekend I had a iMac in da house, and was able to do some testing and compare it to the Hackintosh

the iMac is a 3,4 GHz Intel Core i7, 16GB Ram, SSD drive and AMD Radeon HD 6970M from late 2012

I did several different tests, and its clear that the Hackintosh is fastest, aprox 25% overall

the most convincing one I did, was transcoding some RED footage, both 5k and 2,5k
the iMac used 204 minutes and the Hackintosh used 154 minutes

in the Cinebench test, iMac did 42,17fps, and the Hackintosh did 49,19fps in open_gl test, and in CPU iMac did 6,71 pbs and the Hackintosh did 8,37 pbs

mester wrote:
the iMac is a 3,4 GHz Intel Core i7, 16GB Ram, SSD drive and AMD Radeon HD 6970M from late 2012

That would be 2011. The 2012 is nVidia GeForce GTX 680mx

That's the difference between Sandy Bridge and Ivy Bridge CPU and a better GPU as well.
While Barefeats only did a few basic tests, the 2012 was around twice as face in GPU related functions although not near as dramatic in CPU related functions as the 2011 iMac which you had.

barefeats.com/imac12b1.html

i've now built my second fcpx hackintosh; the first one is a i7-2500k, Radeon 6850, running 10.7, and i recently got an ivy bridge i7 with a nVidia 560ti. both work extremely reliably, and with SSDs, simply fly.

the systems cost a fraction of what i could get a new, dated mac pro for. the systems are as reliable as the legitimate mac systems they work side by side everyday. I fully support the use of hackintoshes as they fill a niche that apple ignores: the mid-budget computer with no monitor but with room for internal expansion.

and yes, i use them in a professional production environment. (omg)

If you're not using XEON processors you're building an iMac with PCIe slots. XEONS are expensive so you can't at all compare to a MacPro.